October 18, 2017

Nothing like a little Catholic humor to start the day. Cribbed from Facebook, only attributable to "Susan":

On their way to get married, a young Catholic couple is involved in a fatal car accident. They find themselves sitting outside the Pearly Gates, waiting for St. Peter to process them into Heaven.While waiting, they begin to wonder: Could they possibly get married in Heaven?When St. Peter shows up, they ask him.St. Peter says, "I don't know. This is the first time anyone has asked that. Let me go and find out."...and he leaves.The couple sit and wait, and wait. Two months pass and thecouple is still waiting. As they wait, they discuss that if they were allowed to get married in Heaven, what was the eternal aspect of it all. "What if it doesn't work?" they wondered. "Are we stuck together forever?"After yet another month, St. Peter finally returns, looking somewhat bedraggled "Yes," he informs the couple, "You can get married in Heaven.""Great!" says the couple, "But we were just wondering, what if things don't work out? Can we also get a divorce in Heaven?"St. Peter, red-faced with anger, slams his clipboard onto theground!! "What's wrong?" asks the frightened couple."OH, COME ON!" St. Peter shouts, "It took me three months to find a priest up here! Do you have any idea how long it'll take me to find a lawyer?

September 26, 2017

Jews for Protection of Firearms Ownership cites this "study", which debunks itself on the rule of statistical insignificance. The study's pushers (yes, anti-gun scammers are just like drug pushers, so we call them that here) survey Maryland's population, only 3.5# of the males there come from rural areas, and guess what the "study" concludes? It concludes that EEvil Gunzz are to blame for most male suicides in Maryland! Anyone drawing that conclusion from those facts should be publicly exposed as Charlatans, and thank God we have JFPO to do that.

I looked into the American Public Health Association, because as a kid, I remember my dad belonged to that org. Dad was a Doctor and diplomate of the Harvard School of Public Health. When I opened APHA's front page, the "issues" it addresses as a group appeared to be right out of a Democratic Party Talking Points briefing or a stump speech by a (D) Mayoral candidate for Baltimore, MD. (Human-caused Global Warming is a HEALTH problem?). Next, I looked for Bloomberg's ugly footprints in this rose-garden, and sure enough, I found some. Michael Bloomberg, the Daddy Warbucks of anti-2A politics, bought into the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health (Baltimore, MD) years ago just to lend "Authenticity" (read: pump anti-gun beeEss into his politics) to his anti-2A work.

So, another debunked anti-gun "scientific study" for which any dumb schmuck with a plugged-up nose could find the stink of Bloomberg on. Not fake news, but not really news, either. ALL of these "studies" have been engineered to give fake authenticity to anti-gun propaganda. Go over to Joe's Place, he will have many, many more listed over there. Between Joe and JPFO sleuthing around the the lairs of the anti-gunners, they just can't hide.

There IS real news here though, news which supports the debunking that JPFO did. For this news, you need a bit more education than the Democrats would give you. You need some actual study in the history of Philosophy. That's not hard to find, it is a freshman or sophomore-level course at almost every college and university. You can probably take it at your local Community College for $120 or so. After you've had that course or it's equivalent in self-study, you will find that discussions of suicide MUST involve studying Philosophy. Academically, and the Left is nothing if not "Academic", right? (Karl Marx said so, so it must be so, right?), the subject of suicide is ALWAYS philosophical, and most philosophies are against it, most religions, too.

Why does society fight the idea of self-destruction so hard? Simple: they always have. How did such anti-suicide policy get ingrained in Judeo-Christian society so deeply? Simple! It's numbers. When times are hard, and they ALWAYS were hard in the Olden Days, despair at the current life's status one finds one's self in was very common. To prevent society from collapsing of low numbers, Judeo-Christian leaders formulated TWO diktats: first, "Go forth and Multiply" (Book of Genesis 1:28 {KJV}) The second diktat is that one's body belongs to God, therefore, we lack the right to destroy it:

(1 Corinthians 6:19-20 NIV) [19] Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; [20] you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body. We are not our own. It is up to God when we die not us. It is hard to argue that a person who kills himself is honoring God with his body.) This last quote is via a very good source, Behind the Badge, btw.

Some philosophical codes don't go as far as saying your body belongs only to God, though. The Bushido code, for one. It was the behavioral code of requirements for the Samurai class of ancient Japan. This code DID include women, btw, so get lost with your feminist cant, ladies. The Bushido Code had a place where suicide was MANDATORY, and that was if you failed it's basic tenets, your military superior could order you to take your own life (Seppuku). I read the Bushido code, never subscribed to all of it. Some of my married-into-family had Samurai roots though, so I got to hear tales of the Bushido Code around the dinner table.

I subscribe to a simple Warrior's code, and yes, I'm a warrior so I can do that. In my Warrior Code, I get to choose the time and place of my own death. Me, Myself and I are the only ones responsible OR empowered for that. As a Warrior should, I have contemplated what conditions I would have to be in to choose to end my life. I KNOW when I would do that, and I only will know when and until that point comes, if it ever does. To give you salacious readers some respite, let me just say that I'm nowhere near that point, as old and decrepit as I might be, I soldier on and suffer through it all.

Did I just digress? No, I just put my literary spear in the belly of ALL these "suicide studies", the VAST majority of which are from simpletons regurgitating ancient philosophy, to say something nice about them. There is NOTHING nice to say about the anti-2A people, they are simply wannabe dictators, and our Constitution AND our Warrior Codes all tell us that those folks are Enemies of our State. If you actually read all my above screed, you KNOW that suicide is not about guns, it's about personal choices.

September 11, 2017

Sixteen years ago, I was just grasping the significance of the attacks in New York City, then Pennsylvania, then DeeCee. Today, I still have most of that analytic mind left, and have looked back to that Day of Terror once again.

As I look back at our Longest War, the War on Terror, I note several things. Here they are:

The designation, "War on Terror", is incomplete. It should have been the "War on Islamic Terror". It still could be. See to that, Mr. President.

Even as we've fought against Islamist terror for the past 16 years, we've only done so sporadically and NOT effectively. We have killed NO Islamist mullahs at all.

Our own politicians, notably President Obama (raised in Islam), have acted sometimes as a Fifth Column against our war efforts. NONE of them has been indicted for Treason, yet many have committed it. Fix that, Mr. President.

President Trump, today we again read Twenty-nine Hundred and Seventy-Seven names. Honor them properly. Make this war a Total War, and vanquish Islamism. If there is a "peaceful religion" there, it can stay, but if there isn't, the entire farce of a giant death-cult needs to be shoveled into the dustbin of history. Thank you Sir.

May 28, 2017

During rush hour on Friday, on a busy Max train platform, a whacko who considers himself Christian (he isn't, follows ZERO Christian principles), targeted two women, one wearing a Hijab (Islamic clothing article) and began to rant at them. Two transit customers immediately gave a heated verbal response while others watched. The crazy pulled a knife and started slashing. Before it was over, the two loudest Social Justice Warriors lay dead, throats cut, and another bystander, her role not clear, was wounded as well (she will survive). The perp ran off, but was quickly apprehended by the police.

Now the fallout begins. Today, another Social Justice Warrior who also happens to be a newspaper Editor, Samantha Swindler, writes an editorial WHICH IS PUBLISHED ON PAGE TWO AS NEWS!!! If you get the Oregonian, you will note that she is NOT identified as an Editor, and in fact, her editorial is in the news section. That's a HUGE mistake, but it shows what the mass media is all about these days: claiming to inform us while actually propagandizing us.

Ms. Swindler leads her article:

A white Christian extremist is accused of murdering two men who stood up to defend a pair of teenage girls being harassed for their religion on a MAX train.

This is where unchecked hate can lead.

She ends it:

No one can turn away. The brave must stand up.

We cannot let fear silence us.

The Editor said NOTHING about the obvious bad choice of the slasher's victims to face a crazy man down. When the facts of this event are stacked up, the SJWs' bad choices are what led directly to their wounds. It has "bad optics" to say this, but the fact that these 2 people loudly opposed the perp's crazy, and also FREE speech got them killed.

The newspaper won't have the guts to put that out there, so I will.

Folks, it's sometimes called the "New York System", but when in the public, ESPECIALLY when riding transit with it's confined spaces and crowds limiting your freedom of defensive movement, you simply DO NOT GET VERBAL, no matter the provocation. Once that man pulled his knife, someone HAD to get cut unless a better actual (not social justice) Warrior was there to do proper battle with him. Even a gun-bearer would have had a hard time in that crowd. There would have been a large chance of a bullet striking an innocent. The bottom line there is that once the crazy felt challenged enough to get his knife out, de-escalation had no chance.

As for Editor Swindler, YOUR bad choices in your article may just get more people killed. The Publisher should have known better than to let you pull this stunt.

September 26, 2015

Given the propensity of the Vatican to engage in shady banking operations, and given the sudden and forceful entry of the Vatican into the highly suspect GreenScam arena of wealth transfer, this blogger feels that it is appropriate to connect the dots and ask what other GreenScam ideas the Vatican Bank is involved with. The previous Pope, Paul VI, endorsed Carbon Credit Trading, and presumably, had the Vatican Bank involved in that shady scheme. Pope Francis wrote a papal bull opposing this position, but does that mean that GreenScamming by the Vatican has ceased?

Since Pope Francis has endorsed forced re-distribution of income on the basis of "carbon reduction", one might easily imagine that there are some sticky Vatican banking fingers in this pie.

Based on the Socialist Pope's green-thusiasm, I think we can refer to any such discovered hanky-panky as "PopeScam" from now on.

September 25, 2015

...and all it is is socialist talking points. One tiny statement about terrorism, but not pinning it on Islam.

Summary: this Pope continues to march Leftward, and continues to fail to stand in the breach FOR Christianity and AGAINST Islam. In my book, he has abandoned the mission of the leader of Christians. He embodies the "Saint Peter Principle" to the max - promoted too many stations beyond his level of competence.

September 21, 2015

If you are a sailor (sailboat sailor, not a Navy Swabbie), you will recognize the title. It is the mariner's way of expressing complete frustration with something. Of course, you CAN'T piss up a rope, something about gravity getting in the way of that.

One might surmise that any mariner who actually TRIED to piss up a rope once wouldn't try it again (unless said mariner liked the idea of "golden showers"), would use the scuppers instead or just hang it over the side and let fly, but then that would fail to account for STUPID.

Our Congress is Stupid, and they are about to Piss up a Rope again, the rope being trying to end or damage the right of women to control their own fertility, by aborting foetuses if necessary. The last time I saw a stat on this, 70 percent of US adults supported this right, as it came into being in the SCOTUS case of Roe v. Wade. It is NOT often that 70% of US adults agree on ANYTHING with political overtones.

The political Right has this Albatross around it's neck, and that albatross is the Religious Right, composed almost entirely of evangelical Christians. These Christians firmly believe that abortion is morally wrong, and ought to be made legally wrong again. Since they will never get anything stricter than the Hyde Amendment past a liberloon President like Obanana, one would think that they would stop trying, but they won't stop, because they are STUPID.

Here's my take: I am personally (morally) opposed to the very idea of abortion on several grounds, but I am opposed to Establishing Christianity (or any other religion) into our Constitution even more. Putting a religious idea such as a foetus being viable from conception into our law-books is strictly forbidden by our Constitution. Sure, let's have a debate to settle when a foetus can generally be considered viable (via scientific process), and give the foetus "person-hood" protection at that point, but that point is not now, nor ever will be, conception.

GOP, quit pissing up this rope. It could, and maybe SHOULD, cost you your majority if you try.

February 10, 2014

Now that you're briefed, let's think about the implications, something most ordinary folks don't do, and it's why the culture is going down the drain.

I'm taking the side of the Government in this case, even though Secretary Sebelius is on my Top Five list of people I would like to see removed from the employ of taxpayers.

This case is NOT about Obamacare, as much as the punditocracy would like you to believe that ("OMG, they're attacking the Law of the Land, these religious nuts are"). No, this case is about whether or not a CORPORATION may establish religion and require all it's employees to follow that religion.

If Hobby Lobby, a corporation employing 16,000 people, is able to deny it's employees ANY part of a Federal benefit, and do that in the name of the religion of the CEO (and Board of Directors, presumably), then Religion has been Established.

The First Amendment, and the "Establishment Clause" within it, says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Okay then, does Obamacare "establish" a religion? No, it doesn't (except for that pesky provision exempting Islam and followers of it from some of the law's restrictions).

Does Obamacare prohibit the "free exercise" of religion? Hobby Lobby says it does, and insofar as the provision of birth control is concerned, Obamacare seems to go against the corporate diktat of Hobby Lobby, the Corporation.

Okay, it would appear that the crux of this matter will revolve around who the Founders were protecting when they wrote the Establishment Clause. Were they protecting classes, or were they protecting individuals? I'm in over my head divining Constitutional law here, but I've been told that the freedoms of the Bill of Rights were and are meant to protect individuals, not groups or classes, except as those classes have been proven to be victims of discrimination per se, as in racial discrimination.

The CEO of Hobby Lobby is claiming, by the fact of his lawsuit, that he has the right to speak for all the people working for the corporation, and thereby control their religious choice which is permitted, nay mandated, under the First Amendment. Of course, if the SCOTUS agrees with that, they have just established corporate slavery as de jure law.

All the Government has to do to defend Obamacare in this case is find a couple of Hobby Lobby employees who don't want their birth control rights proscribed by the CEO, and the Government wins, IMHO. If I am the Chief Justice, I communicate with the US Counsel, and ask him to present an order to require Hobby Lobby to poll their employees, all of them, as to their choice, and when the Government presents that request for injunction, I grant it. In granting the injunction, I warn Hobby Lobby, the Corporation, that the polling carries the weight of a Federal Order, and any interference with it would be considered obstruction of justice.

Back to my readers.

Why, you ask, would a blogger such as myself, having taken on the Government as many times as I have, be siding with them and encouraging their case?

The answer is simple, if you look very far beyond our borders. What is the biggest threat to the culture? If you said Socialism, you are wrong, dead wrong. The biggest threat is the ascendancy of the culture of Islam. Islam is far, far more of a threat to our form of Western Civ than Socialism. No, I'm not downplaying the threat of Socialism to our Constitution, but just look at the European nations which fall all over themselves to accomodate Islam. In doing so, they have knuckled under to the establishment of Islam's claim of "right" to rule it's adherents by Sharia Law. In France, for example, the Government drew lines on maps around all the Islamic ghettoes, and told the Imams therein that they could run those ghettoes by Sharia Law as enclaves beyond French control, except in matters of public safety, but in reality, public safety issues also are left to the Islamic religious hierarchy.

In other words, the Frogs have given away significant parts of their big cities to the mullahs to run.

Readers, do we want that here? No, I'm not saying that the Hobby Lobby CEO is a screwy as a mullah, or that his Christianity compares inany way to the inhumanity of Islam, but if he wins his case, people, we have started down France's road. We need to be fair in our application of the Bill of Rights, and I have a dollar to your dime that says that the day Hobby Lobby wins this case, a new case to require allowing Sharia Law primacy over local and/or Federal Law gets filed in a Federal Court somewhere in this Nation.